Hi there, I probably wrote the code and the documentation (?) but I haven’t used either in a while. If it’s all the same, perhaps keeping the current behaviour (and changing the documentation) is the strategy of least surprise?
Cheers, Martin Travis Scrimshaw <tsc...@ucdavis.edu> writes: > Anyone have any thoughts on this? If not, then I will assume that the > documentation was the intended behavior. > > Best, > Travis > > > On Sunday, December 23, 2018 at 7:15:00 AM UTC+10, Travis Scrimshaw wrote: >> >> It has to do more specifically with how GF(2^k) elements are interpreted >> by an SBox. The documentation says they are treated differently than the >> code, and I wanted to know which was correct. In particular, it was >> interpreted in the code as a list in opposite order. So I would like to >> know which is the correct behavior, which shows up in the >> interpolation_polynomial doctests. >> >> Best, >> Travis >> >> >> On Thursday, December 20, 2018 at 1:17:38 AM UTC+10, Friedrich Wiemer >> wrote: >>> >>> Is there anyone who used the SBox.interpolation_polynomial? >>> Travis and I found a wird behaviour of the SBox.__call__ regarding >>> finitie field elements as inputs and think that this is a bug.This is fixed >>> in #25633 but it would be nice if someone who used this input (e.g. >>> indirectly with the `interpolation_polynomial` method) could review this >>> change and check if this brakes something? >>> >> -- _pgp: https://keybase.io/martinralbrecht _www: https://martinralbrecht.wordpress.com _jab: martinralbre...@jabber.ccc.de _otr: 47F43D1A 5D68C36F 468BAEBA 640E8856 D7951CCF -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
